* Under Obama’s stewardship, we have lost 2.2 million jobs (and 900,000 full-time jobs in the last four months alone). He is now on track to have the worst jobs record of any president in the modern era.

* July marked the 30th consecutive month in which the unemployment rate was above the 8 percent level, the highest since the Great Depression.

* Since May 2009 — roughly 14 weeks into the Obama administration — the unemployment rate has been above 10 percent during three months, above 9 percent during 22 months, and above 8 percent during two months.

* Chronic unemployment is worse than during the Great Depression.

* The youth employment rate is at the lowest level since records were first kept in 1948.

* The share of the eligible population holding a job has declined to the lowest level since the early 1980s.

* The housing crisis is worse than in the Great Depression. (Home values are worth roughly one-third less than they were five years ago.)

* The rate of economic growth under Obama has been only slightly higher than the 1930s, the decade of the Great Depression. From the first quarter of 2010 through the first quarter of 2011, we experienced five consecutive quarters of slowing growth. America’s GDP for the second quarter of this year was a sickly 1.0 percent; in the first quarter, it was 0.4 percent.

* Fiscal year 2011 will mark the third straight year with deficits in excess of $1 trillion. Prior to the Obama presidency, we had never experienced a deficit in excess of $1 trillion.

* During the Obama presidency, America has increased its debt by $4 trillion.

That is to say, Obama has achieved in two-and-a-half years what it took George W. Bush two full terms in office to achieve — and Obama, when he was running for president, slammed Bush’s record as being “unpatriotic.”

* America saw its credit rating downgraded for the first time in history under the Obama presidency.

* Consumer confidence has plunged to the lowest level since the Carter presidency.

* The number of people in the U.S. who are in poverty is on track for a record increase on President Obama’s watch, with the ranks of working-age poor approaching 1960s levels that led to the national war on poverty.

* A record number of Americans now rely on the federal government’s food stamps program. More than 44.5 million Americans received Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, a 12 percent increase from one year ago.

Fascinating, Captain...this species is capable of reading and writing, yet has absolutely no idea what words are when you string them together into sentences.

VFish, Alter's not asking you to put out statistics on the economy. Everyone knows the economy sucks. He's asking you to tell Obama what he could have done differently. Instead of passing the stimulus bill, which worked btw, what bill would you have put through Congress in January 2009? Had that failed as you so ignorantly claim, what bill would you have put through Congress next? Interestingly, FDR is the last President to have encountered what Obama is going through...and he's ranked our #1 or #2 President in most opinion polls. Given the climate Obama entered, the recession, the hostility, the racism, can you at least admit he passed a lot of what he wanted?...thus signifying his ability to accomplish?

1. He over sold the stimulus - whether or not the stimulus was effective is debatable, but one thing is for certain the Obama administration oversold it, promising it would hold unemployment @ 8% and that we’d be in the second summer of recovery by now.

2. He too often “leads from behind” as he puts it. The stimulus and healthcare bills are prime examples. He delegated these massive bills to Reid and Pelosi, so it’s not surprising the Stimulus was a disappointment and ObamaCare FUBAR.

3. He’s a crony capitalist. Want an example? Look no further than his handling of the auto bailout.

4. He’s fostered an anti-business environment with tons of new regulation, constant demagoging, relentlessly harping about the need to raise taxes, and yet he can’t understand why economy hasn’t recovered and investment is stagnant

These are just a few specifics, the list goes on and on. There is a reason most Americans think he has mishandled the ecomony.

4. He’s fostered an anti-business environment with tons of new regulation, constant demagoging, relentlessly harping about the need to raise taxes, and yet he can’t understand why economy hasn’t recovered and investment is stagnant

These are just a few specifics.

Click to expand...

I'm highlighting these three sentences as an effort to further explain what Wankler meant, VFish. It is literally - not figuratively or rhetorically, but physically - impossible to be a crony capitalist who actively fosters an anti-business environment while leading from behind. It just cannot happen. If you were trying to program this as computing language, you'd get the Error screen. If you were a physicist, it'd be like trying to turn lead into gold without removing any of the protons and neutrons from the nucleus. If you were a porn star, it'd be...

...I digress. But again, you've completely missed the point. The point is not to tick off a laundry list of things you don't like. The point is to come out and tell me, if you were President on January 20th, 2009, what specific proposal you would have implemented instead. Seriously, I would like to hear what budget proposals, what foreign policy, what domestic initiatives you would tackle.

the request for facts has elicited the tired echo chamber chorus of lies, obfuscations and dissembling mixed in with vile ad hominem slurs...you know—standard operating procedure for the Republican party going back to Richard Nixon's 1968 campaign.
​

​

And another...

The president inherited a totally demolished "team" after 8 year of r*pe and pillage. De-reg and factory closures had totally destroyed much of America's manufacturing base, and the only engine of the economy was the housing bubble. He has fought since day one with big money and the Koch brothers, and has had a spine to try to stand up in the hurricane.

I really wonder where we really would be now if we had a McCain/Pallin team in the White house? We have seen in the past with Regan and Bush what happens when you let the GOP ideologues run the roost, total devastation. Every day people should be saying, Yes he could have done more, yes he could have done better, thank the brains of the electorate that we do not have the "maverick" team in there. ​

That's all well and good, but can you tell me what specific proposals you would have enacted if elected President in 2008 and taking office 1/20/2009? You're dodging this question - I think I know why - but I'd really like to see you take a stab at it.

To begin with I’d have invoked an economic Hippocratic oath to “do no harm”. That means no ObamaCare, no Dodd-Frank, and rather than borrow a trillion dollars to dole out rewards to political allies any stimulus would have followed Keynesian principles of stimulus, i.e. quick, targeted, and temporary.

BTW, there’s a pretty good response to Mr. Alter in the comments from a moniker “ChallengeResponse”. It is too long to repost here, but you should check it out.

Joe gets up at 6:00 AM to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot full of good clean drinking water because some liberal fought for minimum water quality standards. He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to insure their safety and work as advertised.

All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employers medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance, now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs this day. Joe’s bacon is safe to eat because some liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.

Joe takes his morning shower reaching for his shampoo; His bottle is properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents because some liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some tree hugging liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government subsidized ride to work; it saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees. You see, some liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.

Joe begins his work day; he has a good job with excellent pay, medicals benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

It's noon time, Joe needs to make a Bank Deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe’s deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some liberal wanted to protect Joe’s money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the depression.

Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae underwritten Mortgage and his below market federal student loan because some stupid liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his life-time.

Joe is home from work, he plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive to dad's; his car is among the safest in the world because some liberal fought for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans. The house didn't have electric until some big government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification. (Those rural Republicans would still be sitting in the dark.)

He is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives on Social Security and his union pension because some liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to.

After his visit with dad he gets back in his car for the ride home.

He turns on a radio talk show. The host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. (He doesn't tell Joe that his beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day)

Joe agrees. "We don't need those big government liberals ruining our lives; after all, I'm a self made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have."

To begin with I’d have invoked an economic Hippocratic oath to “do no harm”. That means no ObamaCare, no Dodd-Frank, and rather than borrow a trillion dollars to dole out rewards to political allies any stimulus would have followed Keynesian principles of stimulus, i.e. quick, targeted, and temporary.

BTW, there’s a pretty good response to Mr. Alter in the comments from a moniker “ChallengeResponse”. It is too long to repost here, but you should check it out.

Click to expand...

So when you came in on January 20th, your Presidency would have consisted of a "Do No Harm" executive order issued to the federal bureaucracy. It sounds like your Presidency would consist of vetoing all incoming legislation, then? Seriously - how hard is it for you to say "I would have made a stimulus consisting of tax cuts" or "my plan to reform the health care system would have been X" or "I would have broken up the banks" or "I would have cut the SEC regulatory scheme." Is it such a bankrupt political philosophy and devoid of anything but hatred for a black President that all you can do is seethe your hatred of what has happened, rather than advocate a series of new policies?

Dude, I am not the President, I am not running for President, I simply get to vote for a Presidental candidate.

I said if any Keynesian stimulus were proposed it should adhere to Keynesian principles. That seems reasonable, no? ChrisM and I had long discussions on what stimulus would and wouldn't work back in 2009. Obama borrowed one trillion dollars to fund a lot of Democratic projects that had been shelved for good reason and now we have very little to show for it.

I also pointed you to a well thought out comment on that ridiculous Jonathan Alter piece. I don't suppose you could be bothered to read it?

Dude, I am not the President, I am not running for President, I simply get to vote for a Presidental candidate.

I said if any Keynesian stimulus were proposed it should adhere to Keynesian principles. That seems reasonable, no? ChrisM and I had long discussions on what stimulus would and wouldn't work back in 2009. Obama borrowed one trillion dollars to fund a lot of Democratic projects that had been shelved for good reason and now we have very little to show for it.

I also pointed you to a well thought out comment on that ridiculous Jonathan Alter piece. I don't suppose you could be bothered to read it?

Click to expand...

The entire point - the only reason - the very existence for - and the ultimate conclusion of - the meaning of my demand for people to answer that question...What would you do, since you disapprove of Obama? Because they way our system works is that you get to vote for your choice of candidates. Given that the Republican position is to reflexively oppose Obama (show me the GOP plan if you disagree with that statement), I ask ordinary citizens. So does Alter. So does Ezra. So did Chait. Everyone has responded with wonderful ideas of what they would do if they were King and Emperor, but no ideas for what they would do if they were President.

I really don't believe you put much thought into your writing, but I want you to this one time. WHAT would you do differently? I don't care about what you would not do - it's fairly obvious to everyone here that you aren't a fan of the current President. I want you to lay out a plan. And this isn't about VFish; nobody else here has taken up the challenge. It's likely because none of you have any ideas.

What's that phrase? If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything? The same ought to be applied to policymaking. If you couldn't do it better, maybe don't say anything at all.

I also pointed you to a well thought out comment on that ridiculous Jonathan Alter piece. I don't suppose you could be bothered to read it?

Click to expand...

I have read his comment, and I do believe that most comments in political blogs are moronic. His does nothing to deter that. Let's go through the fallacies one at a time, shall we?

1:

You mention policy on Libya. The President should have acted far more
quickly and forcefully with an air campaign. If he had done so, this
phase of the war would have ended in days not weeks, as the President
promised, and their would have been significantly fewer Libyan lives
lost.

Click to expand...

The air campaign in Libya was faster than virtually any other civil war in the history of mankind. For anyone to believe that an air campaign would have destroyed Qaddafi in days is absolutely insane.

2:

The President could pass
almost any legislation he wanted to, and he did. The stimulus was
enacted so swiftly that the Congress had little time to review it
before voting. The administration said this haste was necessary because
the stimulus would improve the economy so quickly and included numerous
"shovel ready" jobs. The administration's economic theory predicted
that the stimulus would hold unemployment below 8%. In fact, none of
these things have been true. The public is rightly distrustful of
Keynesian stimulus after this performance. It's entirely reasonable to
conclude that the stimulus was just an excuse for a government payout
to the President's political allies: unions, government employees,
green technology firms, etc.

Click to expand...

We have already shown you Holtz-Eakin's graph showing that the stimulus succeeded, with a multiplier effect of $2.10. Yes, Obama was foolish to say it would keep unemployment below 8%, but the fact that it succeeded shows that Keynesian stimulus projects still work.

3:

We can agree that Ben Bernake, appointed by President Bush, and the
TARP bailouts of the banks that Bush pushed for have been successful.
The bailout of Chrysler, General Motors, and their unions is another
case. It is highly unlikely that the government will ever be fully
repaid, and Ford has performed better without a bailout. There's no
evidence that restructuring Chrysler and General Motors through the
normal bankruptcy process would have performed any worse, and there
wouldn't have been any political favoritism involved.

You claim the Affordable Care Act couldn't possibly have a negative
effect on the economy. "And Republicans have offered no evidence for
their
claim that the Affordable Care Act (which includes tax credits
for small businesses) has contributed to current levels of
unemployment. How could it? The program hasn’t even fully begun
yet." Business investment and hiring isn't based entirely on current
conditions; a far greater factor is anticipated future returns. The
Affordable Care Act will significantly affect most business for the
worse, and they are reluctant to hire employees and make risky
investments because of it.

Click to expand...

Well, he tried. Dude, I don't know what to tell you. You have shown no willingness to learn anything you're not interested in knowing. You have shown no ability to think critically or analytically. Your desire to come on here is to be a cheerleader for white conservative American causes, and that's it. So either you tell me what differently you'd do specifically as President, or you don't criticize the current administration. That's it.

You seem to think that bad ideas are better than nothing. I don't. During the campaign Obama promised to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. Instead he's quadrupled it. His budget director once said “if you can’t budget you can’t govern”. Obama has never passed a budget and his last attempt got 0 votes in the Senate. THAT’S ZERO, NONE, NADA, ZILCH!
You can lecture all you want, but for most of us it is becoming obvious this is a failed Presidency even by Obama’s own standards.

You seem to think that bad ideas are better than nothing. I don't. During the campaign Obama promised to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. Instead he's quadrupled it. His budget director once said “if you can’t budget you can’t govern”. Obama has never passed a budget and his last attempt got 0 votes in the Senate. THAT’S ZERO, NONE, NADA, ZILCH!
You can lecture all you want, but for most of us it is becoming obvious this is a failed Presidency even by Obama’s own standards.

Click to expand...

That's all well and good, but can you tell me what specific proposals you would have implemented upon becoming President in January 2009? If your answer is "nothing," you must not have seen this graph:

Dude, let Barry run for reelection on that graph, but "Things could have been a whole lot crappier" isn't much of campaign slogan.

Click to expand...

No, it isn't. But since you have no intention of giving him any credit for the fact that his actions did, indeed, keep the recession from being much worse is at the heart of why politics in this country is so ********ed up right now.

You would rather the economic situation be far worse than admit that the President at least tried and to a great extent stopped the bleeding.

You don't have to come up with an alternative. It is much easier to sit on your ass on the sidelines and criticize. It's apparently all you are capable of.